• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trillion Dollar Coin

They could keep the mold and mint another one when needed. They have to be very careful because once this precedent is set, it could lead to big inflation problems later. A thousand trillion dollars of new money would almost certainly cause hyperinflation. That's just crazy talk.

Are you sure? What do you make of this?


http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/the-trillion-dollar-coin-is-a-conservative-meme.html

Why not mint a $60 T coin?

I favor this fourth alternative above all, because it institutionalizes the idea that there is a distinction between appropriations, the Congressional mandate to spend particular amounts on particular goods and services, and the capability to spend the mandated accounts by having the funds (electronic credits) in the public purse (the TGA). In a fiat currency system, the capability always exists if the legislature provides for it under the Constitution, as it has under current platinum coin seigniorage legislation.

It couldn't cause inflation unless the money went into circulation. But the money doesn't have to go into circulation.
 
Since the spot price of an ounce of platinum is ~$1560, a nominal $1T platinum coin would represent $999,999,998,440 of fiat (decreed money). The problem with this scheme is, who is the government going to force into accepting this coin as repayment of debt? China? Wall Street? I vote Wall Street. If Wall Street attempts to "spend" this coin, are they going to cite legal tender law and enlist the government to force the second would-be recipient to accept a (*)$1560 coin to satisfy a one trillion dollar debt?

If not, this is nothing more than glorified debt repudiation, as no sane creditor would accept such a coin.

As long as Wall Street, I don't care who, or which specific bank, is forced to accept this coin, and from thereafter its acceptance must be voluntary (including by the government who issued it), I'm all for it. Sounds like a great idea.

*Bullion coins typically command a premium over the spot value of the metal they contain, reflecting the cost to mint. A 999 billion dollar premium would be exceptional
 
Last edited:
...

If not, this is nothing more than glorified debt repudiation, as no sane creditor would accept such a coin.

...

You really don't get it, do you?

It's ALL accounting fiction. Money is scrip.

This is a perfectly valid means of dealing with the problem, and one I have advocated for years.

And a bit of inflation right now would secure the recovery by cheapening private debt.
 
You really don't get it, do you?

It's ALL accounting fiction. Money is scrip.

This is a perfectly valid means of dealing with the problem, and one I have advocated for years.

And a bit of inflation right now would secure the recovery by cheapening private debt.

He also doesn't seem to get that nobody's suggesting the coin be used as actual currency, all like "Here, China, take our platinum Eagle coin we ordered off the QVC! It's totally a collector's item! Comes with a certificate and everything."
 
And a bit of inflation right now would secure the recovery by cheapening private debt.
Are you sure about that? How much is a "bit"?

The rate on bonds is currently lower than the inflation rate. However, if as a bond holder I became convinced that the US government was trying to cheapen my holdings through a deliberate policy of higher inflation I would probably turn gold bug faster than Tippit. Other bondholders would probably do the same.

Inflation won't do much good if US bonds become so junky that you can't get a decent price for them.
 

Here's what I think: the blog entry is not only sane and rational, but it's commendably responsible as well. The only problem I have is- why stop at a mere $60 trillion? We should create a coin for 100 million billion dollars! After all, the money exists if the government says it does. Benefits for all, and no debt ever again. What could go wrong?
 

Attachments

  • dr-evil.jpg
    dr-evil.jpg
    34.3 KB · Views: 1
Are you sure? What do you make of this?


http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/the-trillion-dollar-coin-is-a-conservative-meme.html



It couldn't cause inflation unless the money went into circulation. But the money doesn't have to go into circulation.
There wouldn't be much point in minting the coin if you don't put the money into circulation.

I suppose you could put it on display and charge the public admission to see it. As a bonus, the massive security needed to keep the coin from falling into the wrong hands would be welcomed by that industry.
 
There wouldn't be much point in minting the coin if you don't put the money into circulation.

Yes, there are legal reasons to do so. Have you read any of this?
 
Of course I have but I would be interested in what ways you think using the money from the coin doesn't put money into circulation.

At what point in the process do you think it does? The money goes out the same way it did before, electronically. The govt declares its debt to be a trillion lower than before due to the deposits on hand and the exact amount of money they paid out before gets paid out. Nothing in the economy behaves differently.
 
The proposal is to deposit the coin in the fed and credit treasury with the money.
  • If you spend the money directly then that is money in circulation.
  • If you use the money to buy up external government debt (QE style) then that is money in circulation.
  • If you use the money to buy up intra-government debt then borrow from those same departments again then that is money in circulation.
 
Are you sure? What do you make of this?


http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/the-trillion-dollar-coin-is-a-conservative-meme.html



It couldn't cause inflation unless the money went into circulation. But the money doesn't have to go into circulation.

Uh, yes it would unless the debt ceiling is raised. But that's the whole reason we are even thinking about it in the first place. To keep the government running and paychecks going out to all the people, people on Social Security, people in the military, government contractors, Medicare doctors and so on, the government would have to spend that money because it wouldn't be allowed to issue any new bonds once we hit the debt ceiling in about a month or two, and there is no other way for them to get the money. Therefore the money has to go into circulation if the debt ceiling isn't raised.

Think of it as a Ring of Power. It would sooner or later corrupt the politicians by eliminating the need for them to make hard choices. There would be no need to raise taxes or even collect taxes at all. With $60 trillion in the bank, the government could pay off the whole national debt, eliminate all taxes and spend pretty much as much as they want on any boondoggle they care to. It's just too tempting.
 
The petition itself, without going into much detail, declares the creation of a $1T coin which is deposited in the US Treasury. This will presumably be used to circumvent the debt ceiling, but not necessarily used to reduce outstanding debt, which was the OP's assumption. To circumvent the debt ceiling, and thus avoid borrowing from the Fed, or say, China, Treasury would either have to a) actually spend the coin itself on a debt that is at least $1T, or b) use it as a license to create a trillion dollar fund to pay its bills - essentially reclaiming its presumed power to create credit-based money from the Fed. Think of this as "making change" for the coin, and breaking it up into smaller denominations.

If the Treasury agrees to accept the coin back and "make change" for it then there would be inflation under either scenario, as new money spent by the government would ultimately wind up as bids for either financial assets, or scarce goods and services in the economy. This, for anyone familiar with my prior posts, would be nothing more than a regressive tax hike - a tax increase on the poor. On the flip side, it would represent the issuance of debt free money, as opposed to delegating that right to the Fed, letting it create trillions, and then loaning that to private banks so they can re-loan it back to the public at interest - usury in its purest form. I have always maintained that if society decides that the public money is to be counterfeited, at the very least it should be highly politicized, since the alternative (which is the premise behind the Fed) is counterfeiting of the public money for private gain!

However, if instead the government under scenario a) uses the coin to instantly pay down part of the national debt, and the coin were NOT accepted back, it would represent a debt default - repudiation, since a 1oz platinum coin marked "one trillion" is certainly not very liquid in that case. This would actually be deflationary, as instead of getting paid in debased money, they wouldnt really be getting paid at all, except for one illiquid coin that might as well be engraved with "**** you, the treasury".

Since, as I maintain that a large portion of the national debt is illegitimate, this would be ideal for the American people in the sense that cancelling a bad debt outwright is more appealing than merely debasing it.
 
Last edited:
Here's what I think: the blog entry is not only sane and rational, but it's commendably responsible as well. The only problem I have is- why stop at a mere $60 trillion? We should create a coin for 100 million billion dollars! After all, the money exists if the government says it does. Benefits for all, and no debt ever again. What could go wrong?

The reason you don't do this in the normal course of events is that if you funded the entire government this way all the time is you would get hyperinflation. Think Weimar Republic.

In the normal course of events, government spending is balanced (somewhat) by taxation, and this limits the growth of the money supply.

But we have ourselves in a situation where the debt service load is way too high right now, and this is a necessary step.

Right now M2 is around $10T. So paying down a trillion in debt by one coining would be 10% inflationary over the lifetime of the bonds. This is blunted this way because we are not placing that money in circulation, we are merely failing to tax enough to cover the money we are spending and this time we are not covering that with a balancing bond.
 

Back
Top Bottom